Pathfinder Book of the Dead

It's that funny thing of "Graveknight is actually paizo original undead that isn't from D&D" that makes me think its pretty likely that if they do undead archetypes that we get that one eventually after the "basic ones" are out

It's that funny thing of "Graveknight is actually paizo original undead that isn't from D&D" that makes me think its pretty likely that if they do undead archetypes that we get that one eventually after the "basic ones" are out

I figure this is likely to be the case. It'll be interesting to see what other Undead options we might see later, if at all. Graveknights, Wights, Wraiths, Shadows, Revenants, and maybe Geist are a few I'd be interested to see.

It's that funny thing of "Graveknight is actually paizo original undead that isn't from D&D" that makes me think its pretty likely that if they do undead archetypes that we get that one eventually after the "basic ones" are out

Lord Soth, the Deathknight, would like a word with you about this "Paizo original" you mention.

I loved the Deathknight right from its Fiend Folio beginnings and came right then with the idea of a cursed armor for Paladins that would slowly change the wearer into one of them.

CorvusMask wrote:

It's that funny thing of "Graveknight is actually paizo original undead that isn't from D&D" that makes me think its pretty likely that if they do undead archetypes that we get that one eventually after the "basic ones" are out

Lord Soth, the Deathknight, would like a word with you about this "Paizo original" you mention.

I loved the Deathknight right from its Fiend Folio beginnings and came right then with the idea of a cursed armor for Paladins that would slowly change the wearer into one of them.

Isn't death knight just a powerful undead paladin/warrior? Like how would graveknight overlap with death knight more than a fext unless its just the similar name?

I'm really excited about this book—I got to write some really cool sections for it!

The Raven Black wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

It's that funny thing of "Graveknight is actually paizo original undead that isn't from D&D" that makes me think its pretty likely that if they do undead archetypes that we get that one eventually after the "basic ones" are out

Lord Soth, the Deathknight, would like a word with you about this "Paizo original" you mention.

I loved the Deathknight right from its Fiend Folio beginnings and came right then with the idea of a cursed armor for Paladins that would slowly change the wearer into one of them.

Isn't death knight just a powerful undead paladin/warrior? Like how would graveknight overlap with death knight more than a fext unless its just the similar name?

Well, Graveknights are pathfinders "martial equivalent of a lich", and as far as I can tell death knights have filled that role for a while, though they didn't explicitly get something equivalent to a phylactery until 3.5.

Eventually 3.5 added the detail where their swords act like a phylactery (it's a pretty impressive show of confidence to hit your enemies with the object that contains your soul), and 4e gave those swords a name (the rather unimaginative "soulsword").

Pathfinder changed things up by making them reform from their armour instead of weapons, and only if someone wears the armour, which is pretty awesome.

It's pretty likely that the Graveknight is Paizo's interpretation of the Death Knight, though as usual they massively improved on 3.5s version of the concept.

I wouldn't mind seeing the "rejuvenating undead weapon" concept of Deathknights make a return. I have this desire and idea to see the Lich and Graveknight rounded out to fill the classic "Fighter Mage, Thief" trope of most rpgs. I imagine an undead creature that form from the souls of murderers, killers, or assassins, whose souls attach themselves to their murder weapon of choice and allows them to rejuvenate the same was a Liches Soulcage and Graveknights armor allows them to do.

Picture it; you're parties Rogue finds a really neat magical dagger that they take as their primary, only for the necrotic energies and corrupt soul of its previous owner, a serial killer once know as the Ripper, begins to take over their body over time, with some sort of mental curse that keeps the wielder from realizing what's happening.

Need.

The Hitcher of the night.

I just wanted to say I am super looking forward to this book ^^

I'm really excited about this book—I got to write some really cool sections for it!

Can confirm that Brian wrote awesome stuff, including at least one of the things folks have heard about already and seemed excited for.

It's pretty likely that the Graveknight is Paizo's interpretation of the Death Knight,

ALSO can confirm this 100%. Graveknight is something Wes Schneider and I came up with as Paizo's version of the powerful undead warlord that D&D used as a death knight once it was apparent that for OGL reasons we couldn't use death knights, and then hired a freelancer (Darrin Drader) to help bring it into the game back in Pathfinder Adventure Path volume 26, "The Sixfold Trial." (I suspect we teased the existence of graveknights in the setting before this, but #26 is the first time they appeared in rules form for Pathfinder).

While the concept of a fireball-throwing death knight is not open content, the idea of a powerful undead knight is not, so a simple name change and a more complex reworking and reinvisioning of the lore later and presto.

I've always seen liches as the iconic spellcaster undead (clerics and wizards etc.), vampires as the iconic skill undead (rogues and bards etc.), so the graveknight is there for the fighter types to keep on menacing the living after death.

Tender Tendrils wrote:

It's pretty likely that the Graveknight is Paizo's interpretation of the Death Knight,

ALSO can confirm this 100%. Graveknight is something Wes Schneider and I came up with as Paizo's version of the powerful undead warlord that D&D used as a death knight once it was apparent that for OGL reasons we couldn't use death knights, and then hired a freelancer (Darrin Drader) to help bring it into the game back in Pathfinder Adventure Path volume 26, "The Sixfold Trial." (I suspect we teased the existence of graveknights in the setting before this, but #26 is the first time they appeared in rules form for Pathfinder).

While the concept of a fireball-throwing death knight is not open content, the idea of a powerful undead knight is not, so a simple name change and a more complex reworking and reinvisioning of the lore later and presto.

I've always seen liches as the iconic spellcaster undead (clerics and wizards etc.), vampires as the iconic skill undead (rogues and bards etc.), so the graveknight is there for the fighter types to keep on menacing the living after death.

Huh. I've not considered vampires that way but it fits really well. I usually think ghoul for rogue-ish undead, but they are certainly too low level baseline to be in the "powerful undead" category.

It's gonna be a long 2-3 months. On top of the player facing stuff I'm just excited for all the undead stat blocks for the GM side of things. I should have more than enough for a Walking Dead campaign.

Ghouls are absolutely great for rogues and that type and are my favorite undead there, but I was mostly thinking about the categories of templated monsters (which, when you get down to it, I think should have been how almost all undead should have been handled from the start of 3rd edition D&D...).

For some reason I've always associated Clerics with Mummies.

So after this Book could we build a party of a Graveknight Fighter, Lich Wizard, Mummy Cleric and Vampire Rogue? Is there a way for the Vampire Rogue to participate if the rest of the party wants to do something during the day?

I might have missed it but you can play a lich as an ancestry? Stop beating my undead heart!

Will there be undead archetypes and if so will they have certain alignment requirements?

I might have missed it but you can play a lich as an ancestry? Stop beating my undead heart!

Will there be undead archetypes and if so will they have certain alignment requirements?

All the undead in this book save for Skeleton are handled as archetypes.

I might have missed it but you can play a lich as an ancestry? Stop beating my undead heart!

Will there be undead archetypes and if so will they have certain alignment requirements?

From earlier in this thread :

Lich archetype for spellcasters

Also what Keftiu said :-)

Thank you both!

For some reason I've always associated Clerics with Mummies.

Me too! Eberron has a lot of mummy cleric of the blood of Vol. Keith Baker has gone into a lot of detail about how Mummies are bound by their vows and rituals.

So after this Book could we build a party of a Graveknight Fighter, Lich Wizard, Mummy Cleric and Vampire Rogue? Is there a way for the Vampire Rogue to participate if the rest of the party wants to do something during the day?

I'm in love with the idea of an all undead party. I wonder if the Blood lords adventure path will support that?

Just reading through all the spoilers for this book now, has made me so exited for it :)

Lord Soth and St. Kargoth would like a word DIE

Going through the threads now, but wondering if this book has plans for accompanying spell and focus cards like we got for the APG and SoM books.

Going through the threads now, but wondering if this book has plans for accompanying spell and focus cards like we got for the APG and SoM books.

Probably depends on how many spells actually are there.

Yoshua wrote:

Going through the threads now, but wondering if this book has plans for accompanying spell and focus cards like we got for the APG and SoM books.

Probably depends on how many spells actually are there.

A Dark Archive Spell Deck would be cool...

I don’t suppose it’s time to know what the Table of Contents says yet, is it?

Here are the chapters:

Table of Contents
Preface
1 Prayers for the Living
2 Hymns for the Dead
3 The Grim Crypt
4 Lands of the Dead
5 March of the Dead
Appendix

I'll show an image of the ToC in Paizo LIVE in late February as motivation to subscribe. :)

Here are the chapters:

Table of Contents
Preface
1 Prayers for the Living
2 Hymns for the Dead
3 The Grim Crypt
4 Lands of the Dead
5 March of the Dead
Appendix

I'll show an image of the ToC in Paizo LIVE in late February as motivation to subscribe. :)

"March of the Dead".

That's not ominous at all...

Here are the chapters:

Table of Contents
Preface
1 Prayers for the Living
2 Hymns for the Dead
3 The Grim Crypt
4 Lands of the Dead
5 March of the Dead
Appendix

I'll show an image of the ToC in Paizo LIVE in late February as motivation to subscribe. :)

I was just thinking about this like yesterday :D

Here are the chapters:

Table of Contents
Preface
1 Prayers for the Living
2 Hymns for the Dead
3 The Grim Crypt
4 Lands of the Dead
5 March of the Dead
Appendix

I'll show an image of the ToC in Paizo LIVE in late February as motivation to subscribe. :)

So I assume chapter 1 is for living characters (new options like the good necromancer), chapter 2 is for undead PCs, chapter 3 is the bestiary, chapter 4 is lore for Golarion and chapter 5 is the adventure. I wonder what's in the Appendix? More than index, I hope ^^

List of zombie movies.

Aaron Shanks wrote:

Here are the chapters:

Table of Contents
Preface
1 Prayers for the Living
2 Hymns for the Dead
3 The Grim Crypt
4 Lands of the Dead
5 March of the Dead
Appendix

I'll show an image of the ToC in Paizo LIVE in late February as motivation to subscribe. :)

So I assume chapter 1 is for living characters (new options like the good necromancer), chapter 2 is for undead PCs, chapter 3 is the bestiary, chapter 4 is lore for Golarion and chapter 5 is the adventure. I wonder what's in the Appendix? More than index, I hope ^^

Ding, ding ding! Well done. I wish I could give you a disturbing doll, like I was a carny.

GGSigmar wrote:

Aaron Shanks wrote:

Here are the chapters:

Table of Contents
Preface
1 Prayers for the Living
2 Hymns for the Dead
3 The Grim Crypt
4 Lands of the Dead
5 March of the Dead
Appendix

I'll show an image of the ToC in Paizo LIVE in late February as motivation to subscribe. :)

So I assume chapter 1 is for living characters (new options like the good necromancer), chapter 2 is for undead PCs, chapter 3 is the bestiary, chapter 4 is lore for Golarion and chapter 5 is the adventure. I wonder what's in the Appendix? More than index, I hope ^^

Ding, ding ding! Well done. I wish I could give you a disturbing doll, like I was a carny.

Would it be asking to much to know the sizes of the chapters? With 224 pages, I'm curious how many pages are put into each section :)

Aaron, could you bless us with some new spoilers?

What does the Soul Warden archetype entail? Is it more psychopomp-y or smite undead-y?

Aaron, could you bless us with some new spoilers?

Probably, but focused on the January product launch first. Just think, soon we will have undead hunters with skeleton ancestries, ifrit versatile heritages, and mooooooore. Squeeeee. :)

Random thought while looking through my library: will this book at all touch on the relation to undead creatures and non-undead spirits? There is a very curious monster in one of the APs that is distinctly described as the dead souls of individuals, but is specifically not undead.

Random thought while looking through my library: will this book at all touch on the relation to undead creatures and non-undead spirits? There is a very curious monster in one of the APs that is distinctly described as the dead souls of individuals, but is specifically not undead.

Reminds me of the definition of a phantom in Secrets of Magic.

Ly'ualdre wrote:

Random thought while looking through my library: will this book at all touch on the relation to undead creatures and non-undead spirits? There is a very curious monster in one of the APs that is distinctly described as the dead souls of individuals, but is specifically not undead.

Reminds me of the definition of a phantom in Secrets of Magic.

Would that suggest that the aforementioned monster is a sort of Phantom?

Either way, I cannot wait to get my hands on this book. Honestly, I'm most curious about the bestiary section. It'll give us a general idea of what to expect from the future with similar books.

Aaron Shanks wrote:

Ly'ualdre wrote:

Random thought while looking through my library: will this book at all touch on the relation to undead creatures and non-undead spirits? There is a very curious monster in one of the APs that is distinctly described as the dead souls of individuals, but is specifically not undead.

Reminds me of the definition of a phantom in Secrets of Magic.

Would that suggest that the aforementioned monster is a sort of Phantom?

Either way, I cannot wait to get my hands on this book. Honestly, I'm most curious about the bestiary section. It'll give us a general idea of what to expect from the future with similar books.

As far as I remember it is supposed to have 100 pages of monsters. Personally I am more excited for player options, both for the undead and the living. I am pretty hyped for undead companions.

Ly'ualdre wrote:

Aaron Shanks wrote:

Ly'ualdre wrote:

Random thought while looking through my library: will this book at all touch on the relation to undead creatures and non-undead spirits? There is a very curious monster in one of the APs that is distinctly described as the dead souls of individuals, but is specifically not undead.

Reminds me of the definition of a phantom in Secrets of Magic.

Would that suggest that the aforementioned monster is a sort of Phantom?

Either way, I cannot wait to get my hands on this book. Honestly, I'm most curious about the bestiary section. It'll give us a general idea of what to expect from the future with similar books.

As far as I remember it is supposed to have 100 pages of monsters. Personally I am more excited for player options, both for the undead and the living. I am pretty hyped for undead companions.

As someone who loves summon spells, monsters ARE player options. Me and my skelly boys rollin down the block.

Since January stuff is out of the way, can we keep fishing for spoilers? It's been brought up a few times - are necrografts in the book?

Perhaps the Ides of March will have new meaning for subscribers ;)

Aaron Shanks wrote:

GGSigmar wrote:

Aaron Shanks wrote:

Here are the chapters:

Table of Contents
Preface 5
1 Prayers for the Living 6
2 Hymns for the Dead 30
3 The Grim Crypt 70
4 Lands of the Dead 174
5 March of the Dead 190
Appendix 212

I'll show an image of the ToC in Paizo LIVE in late February as motivation to subscribe. :)

So I assume chapter 1 is for living characters (new options like the good necromancer), chapter 2 is for undead PCs, chapter 3 is the bestiary, chapter 4 is lore for Golarion and chapter 5 is the adventure. I wonder what's in the Appendix? More than index, I hope ^^

Ding, ding ding! Well done. I wish I could give you a disturbing doll, like I was a carny.

Would it be asking to much to know the sizes of the chapters? With 224 pages, I'm curious how many pages are put into each section :)

Holy s!%&, that’s quite the bestiary!

Are there any Tian Xia locations in the setting chapter?

Are there any Tian Xia locations in the setting chapter?

I can't think of to many places in Tian-Xia where Undead are prevalent enough to merit a discussion in this book. I'd love to be pleasantly surprised. I'll take Dragon Empire lore any day.

Plenty of Tian specific Undead in hoping to see though.

Holy s$*&, that’s quite the bestiary!

Hmm. About 104 pages of monsters? Think maybe 70 to 80 new Undead seems reasonable there.

keftiu wrote:

Are there any Tian Xia locations in the setting chapter?

I can't think of to many places in Tian-Xia where Undead are prevalent enough to merit a discussion in this book. I'd love to be pleasantly surprised. I'll take Dragon Empire lore any day.

Plenty of Tian specific Undead in hoping to see though.

willfromamerica wrote:

Holy s$*&, that’s quite the bestiary!

Hmm. About 104 pages of monsters? Think maybe 70 to 80 new Undead seems reasonable there.

There is Tian Xia's darklands having haunted clockwork city iirc?

Hope we'll get some new place in the Ruins of Azlant region. That place seems like it might have been pretty ripe for a lot of ghosts to appear at one point. Kinda want to see an entire community of Azlanti ghosts, living their lives in denial as if nothing had ever happened, in the wreckage of their former home. Everyone’s super nice up until the moment you point out there's no Azlant anymore. Then you start to see the spectral meteoroids in the sky.

Hope we'll get some new place in the Ruins of Azlant region. That place seems like it might have been pretty ripe for a lot of ghosts to appear at one point. Kinda want to see an entire community of Azlanti ghosts, living their lives in denial as if nothing had ever happened, in the wreckage of their former home. Everyone’s super nice up until the moment you point out there's no Azlant anymore. Then you start to see the spectral meteors in the sky.

This just gave me a fun idea of an ancient Thassilonian individual who had been a restless spirit of some kind before New Thassilon happened. When reality tried to sort out the time paradox, their past living version slammed into their present restless spirit and they become some undead version of themselves. Maybe this doesn't work with the actual narrative established (No idea.) but it makes me grin.